GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268835646


From: Tom Gull <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] English genealogy
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:20:46 -0400
References: <8CC9380BB42F667-1670-4ED4@webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com><578495D37A8576478806751A2CFD2516FCA93F6D@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com>,<042401cac579$e48e34c0$5e82af48@Ken1>,<B509721EFBB049DCB48AC52DD36BF1E7@HP>
In-Reply-To: <B509721EFBB049DCB48AC52DD36BF1E7@HP>


The only number I've heard quoted came from Gary Boyd Roberts if I remember correctly, and his estimate was that you had approximately 100,000,000 American cousins if you could successfully trace your ancestry back into the Great Migration time and place. I'll have to try to trace that at some point but that would be a nominal starting point estimate.

> From:
> To:
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:31:33 -0400
> Subject: Re: [DNA] English genealogy
>
> I picked this up at Wikipedia:
>
> "The New England States were initially colonized by about 30,000 settlers
> between 1620 and 1640, a period since referred to as 'The Great Migration.'
> There was little additional immigration until the Irish influx of the 1840s and
> '50s in the wake of the Great Potato Famine. The almost one million inhabitants
> 130 years later at the time of the Revolution were nearly all descended from the
> original settlers, whose 3 percent annual natural growth rate caused a doubling
> of population every 25 years. Their beliefs and ancestry were nearly all shared
> and made them into what was probably the largest more-or-less homogeneous group
> of settlers in America. Their continued high birth rate continued for at least a
> century more, making the descendants of these New Englanders well represented in
> nearly all states today. "
>
> Is there enough here to calculate what "well represented" would be?
>
> Diana



This thread: